Blog Sections

Friday, June 25, 2010

France and Italy ignominiously out of the World Cup

From the first set of matches there was a clear indication that there would be a rude battle for the worst team. People in the know always trusted France to take the un-coveted award, which it did brilliantly. But the Italians put a good fight for it and deserve clearly the runner up award of worst team of the World Cup, without even the excuses that teams such as North Korea or New Zealand could offer.
The spoiled brat content of the French team went as far as striking against their coach refusing to train. The detachment from reality, the total lack connection with its fan base have degenerated into a French affaire d'état. Even president Sarkozy got involved. The sad fact is that the French team was a set of guys playing for themselves, for their paycheck and what not, but not for the team, the country or their fans. We learned for example that trainers in France told them they were not obliged to sing the Marseillaise, even at the World Cup. Not that singing the Marseillaise before a match would make much of a difference, but it clearly indicated the general mood, how low had the French football system fallen when discussing singing the national anthem becomes as important as scoring.

The Italians on the other hand suffered from deadly conservatism, absolute lack of innovation and a belief that the World Cup was becoming a birth right of sorts. The question here is not how come the Italians did so poorly this Cup, but how they managed to win it 4 years ago! That they managed to win by, among other things, almost beheading Zidane only postponed the inevitable reckoning, allowing them to postpone by another 4 years any change in the Italian league whose Inter performance this year only hides its general decay when compared to the vibrant Spanish league, e.g. This year they paid the price.

And thus for the first time ever, the winner and the runner up of the preceding World Cup are BOTH eliminated in the first round.

But there is good news and bad news besides those pitiful scenes (I, for one, thought that France should not have even qualified which when all is said would have been a much lesser embarrassment than what happened in South Africa).

The Americas have come out as the main power of the football world! All teams but one gained qualification. Only poor Honduras failed to make it to the second round. Africa barely got one team in. Asia did a tad better and Europe did less well than usual (heck! with France and Italy out, with Germany and Spain having a harder time than expected...)

And the bad news is that Venezuela is not about to qualify any time soon. All the teams that beat Venezuela in the qualifying round did make it to the World cup second round...

After the US, I would have rooted for Argentina. As Maradona is a well-documented hincha de Thugo (hincha=fan), I will abstain from supporting Argentina this time. Granted, outside of soccer/football Maradona has the IQ and judgment of a turnip, but even a turnip must be held to accounts. I will not wear my white and sky blue team Argentina shirt this year.

Definitely a lot of teams from the Americas that made it to the second round: 6 of 16 with Chile most likely going to make that 7 out of 16.

Mark my words Daniel, we (the VINOTINTO) will be in Rio in 2010, hopefully having started to rebuild the country after ridding ourselves of the Chavez plague. For starters we will not have to play Brazil as they automatically qualify as hosts. BTW i am going to Johannesburg tomorrow night to follow Brazil on R16, QF SF and Final (if they make it, if not, follow the team that knocks them out) Do you want me to file reports for your loyal readers? Replys here or at armandojtirado AT gmail

Ok, so I am supposed to be colorblind when it comes to human beings. Well, sorry, I am NOT colorblind. I see 8 black guys and 3 white ones playing for France. So I already broke every PC rule in the book, but last time I checked, PC is NOT LAW. And I am American (sorry leftist nitpickers, yes, I did say AMERICAN) and my constitution allows me to say these things (see free speech 1st constitutional amendment) without any kind of retribution by my government, at least while I am in the USA.

And for those who still don’t understand what free speech means, here’s that humble explanation again: when it hurts one’s contrarian opinion the most, that’s EXACTLY when one has to allow for free speech.

Having said that and getting the political BS out of the way, could it (omg) be that the majority of the French people cannot identify with its soccer team? which has last names as foreign as Bratwurst in the land of haute cuisine? And, let’s try to forget skin color, ergo racism. But, can we? REALLY? I don’t think so, it’s probably part of it LIKE IT OR NOT.

Very little French pride left. And France used to be the one that was more nationalistic than any other core European country.

So let’s all scream together ”Vive la diversité!” and make believe it works for the happiness of all. Except that statistically, the “happiest” countries are not the diversified ones in spite of the leftist media lies and agenda. Google “most happy countries” and find out for yourself. And maybe even the French soccer team proofs it. Sad, but France did it to itself.

Can’t wait for the establishment in a couple of decades of the Islamic Bolivarian Socialist Revolutionary Gaullist Republic, formerly known as France.

At the moment of this writing (30 minutes before the games), Honduras still has a chance to make it. If Chile beats Spain and Honduras beast Switzerland, the last three will have 1 victory and 2 defeats with goal differential determining who goes to the next round.

So they're not mathematically eliminated yet and the Europe-vs-America results so far seem to suggest they still have some chance.

true, i guess. but from my own admission i have been very diffident about the nitpcikness of the cup this time around. in fact, the most i have watched was 10 minutes of france versus mexico and i stopped watching when i started rooting fro mexico. :)

yet, if chile is out it is still quite a good record for the americas.

It seems that all of the Americas are doing quite well, funny enough Daniel regarding France's race to the bottom! although I'd have liked to see Honduras continue in the race, it's still an outstanding effort from the others in the Americas. Sarkozy has already grilled his footballers as to what's happened, too funny to see them brought to the palace only to be dressed down. As a regular reader of the BBC news service I'd love to see England next out. They spend each 4 year cycle telling the world of their excellence yet the cabinet of silver is barren back to 1966. Better yet to have the Germans stone them 4-0. I don't really have a team to scream for in this, Chile or Argentina despite their coach's stupid Che tattoo would be fine by me. Go Americas!

Daniel: Perhaps you'd grant the USA is doing a little better than you had anticipated! they might indeed reach the semis now, with a relatively easy quarter final against either Uruguay or South Korea, should they beat Ghana. Courtesy, of course, of another lousy underperformance by England!Personally, I'm not one who believes Argentina are going to win; I think their defensive weaknesses are going to be exposed when they go up against stronger opposition. Who will? I can't call it yet, but watch Holland and Paraguay.

In World Cups before 2002 only two teams would get automatic positions, the nation host and the previous world champs. After France's performance in 2002 after winning in 1998, a decision was made that the only automatic berth was the host nation. It looks as though Italy in this world cup reaffirms that decision.

1979 Boat People,With respect, those horns used to create that infernal racket in the world cup are called "Venezuelas" (at least that's what a narrator said recently). I will find a Venezuela and make some noise on your behalf and take a picture for all of y'all.....

know what percentage of journalists,media people,interviewers, " academics" in Universities, news programs,Movie producers, and politicians are politically correct and what role political correctness plays in our society?

Or: when when you discover that your pride , is, or is not, acceptable to others.

It doesn't take much really to make a correct observation.

I've noticed a new trend in the past few years. Whenever someone cries 'white power' they instantaneously get a racist label and that's fine with me because in a certain way it could be racist.The Klu Klux klan has cried this out in threat on many occasions.

But what isn't correct is when ever someone cries Black power (whether it is racist or not) they're labeled heroes for fighting the good cause of warding off white man's oppression when in reality it could be racist.

etc.etc.

The connection between this and displaying pride in race should be clear.

I have never heard a person state that while black pride is okay, white pride is wrong. The world being what it is, there probably are some kooks that state such things. But I'm sure they are a tiny minority. What I have heard, however, is the whine of some whites (a small but bitter and insecure proportion of whites) that make the false claim that because of political correctness black pride is now okay, while white pride is not.

I find it hard to believe that anyone who is not a kook would sincerely claim that the above is the prevalent view in the US (the one that is primarily being taught--either directly or by implication--in most schools, colleges as well as the media.)

Yes, all ethnic groups have their resentful and bitter kooks as well as their share of self-hating wimps, but these are people at the margins. To say, though, that what we have now in the US is a culture that encourages people of European descent (whites) NOT to feel good about their ethnicity is laughably wrong.

It is not that most people believe that, but because most people do NOT.

It is that it is politically correctto manifest beliefs that stifle white pride and promote black pride.My whole point is that political correctness is far from the truth.

Political correctness means the limitations on what one can write or talk about without being ridiculed by many based on the trends political parties use to gain votes with.Chavez won elections partially based on this.Their grand allies are in all the media.

It is not a rule like someone might find in the Soviet Union, but rather a trend that is promoted by the media bought out by many politicians.

If we talk to your average Joe, in his heart he does NOT believe what is being promoted.However people in general tend to behave in the way that is publicly sanctioned out of the fear of being different and of not fitting in.

When people do not fit in, they are often publicly 'shamed' and so many people are not strong enough to be the recipient of public shame.This is how those who even though they feel differently behave as though they do not.Clever? Yes, very much so because it works better than a simple rule.But it is far worse for us than simple rules are.It is insidious, it promotes lies, and it plays right into the hands of dirty politicians.

My last comment on this theme in this thread...though I do believethat it is relevant to the so called success of Chavez.

1) Comments are moderated after the third day of publication. It may take up to a day or two for your note to appear then.

2) Your post will appear if you follow the following rules. I will be ruthless in erasing any comment that do not follow these rules, as well as those who replied to that off rule comment.

3)COMMENT RULES: Do not be repetitive. Do not bring grudges and fights from other blogs here (this is the strictest rule). This is an anti Chavez blog, with more than 95% anti Chavez readers that have made up their minds long ago. Thus trying to prove us wrong is considered a troll. Still, you are welcome as a chavista to post,> in particular if you want to explain us coherently as to why chavismo does this or that. We are still waiting for that to happen once.Insults and put downs are frowned upon and I will be sole judge on whether to publish them.